<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2009 (2) TMI 459 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112786</link>
    <description>A mortgage by deposit of title deeds arises when deeds are delivered with intent to create security, and that security need not be confined to a single loan where the surrounding circumstances show multiple dealings and no clear agreement limiting it. Any excess of authority by the person who deposited the deeds was treated as a matter between that person and the appellants, not a defence against the respondent in the absence of privity. The respondent was also entitled to rely on a general lien to retain the security for the overall balance of liabilities, so the restricted claim to redemption failed and return of the title deeds was refused.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Nov 2014 17:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=149802" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (2) TMI 459 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112786</link>
      <description>A mortgage by deposit of title deeds arises when deeds are delivered with intent to create security, and that security need not be confined to a single loan where the surrounding circumstances show multiple dealings and no clear agreement limiting it. Any excess of authority by the person who deposited the deeds was treated as a matter between that person and the appellants, not a defence against the respondent in the absence of privity. The respondent was also entitled to rely on a general lien to retain the security for the overall balance of liabilities, so the restricted claim to redemption failed and return of the title deeds was refused.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=112786</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>